W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Agenda and Logistics July 24 telecon -- CR vote expected

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:37:57 -0400
Message-Id: <p05200f26bb4477a74c4c@[10.0.1.3]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

At 8:39 AM +0100 7/23/03, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>Jim Hendler wrote:
>
>>  3.0 Proposal to Request Candidate Recommendation Status
>>  Proposal and rationale:
>>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jul/0210.html
>>  Draft CE Director's request:
>>  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/rqim.html
>>
>
>Two points, intended as suggestions for discussion under this agendum.
>
>1:
>
>Is this also a resolution to publish CR documents - or do we have 
>another round in which the editors prepare CR drafts and the WG has 
>a chance to review them before a publish vote?
>In any case we probably could do with a round the table summary from 
>the editors as to the current status of the documents.

absolutely - I intended the summary - also given it would take a 
couple of weeks to get Director's approvals, we could make last fixes 
then -- all changes have been approved by the WG, in spirit at least, 
as part of the public LC process, so I'm not expecting problems in 
this area.


>
>2:
>Offlist Jim quoted the following:
>[[
>In the Call for Implementations, the Working Group MAY identify 
>specific features of the technical report as being "features at 
>risk." General statements such as "We plan to remove any 
>unimplemented feature" are not acceptable; the Working Group MUST 
>precisely identify any features at risk. Thus, in response to a Call 
>for Implementations, reviewers can indicate whether they would 
>formally object to the removal of the identified features. After 
>gathering implementation experience, the Working Group MAY remove 
>features from the technical report that were identified as being "at 
>risk" and request that the Director Call for Review of a Proposed 
>Recommendation. If the Working Group makes other substantive changes 
>to the technical report, the Director MUST return it to the Working 
>Group for further work.
>]]


>Given Charles' reservations about passing all the tests we should 
>determine   and document which features are at risk.
>For this task, it would be useful to know which tests have noone 
>claiming victory at the moment.
>We should clarify in our call for implementations that there may be 
>substantive changes in individual tests when implementors indicate 
>that the tests do not conform to S&AS.

Great idea -- there was wording to this effect in your LC document, 
and it would be good to include something similar in your editors' 
draft.

>
>
>
>Jeremy

-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***
Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2003 13:41:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT